Hallen v Angledal [1999] NSWSC 552

Hallen v Angledal [1999] NSWSC 552

Defendants failed to satisfy the court that a proper application had been made to a competent authority in Sweden to set aside the award, or to show a prima facie case. No basis for stay/adjournment on grounds of stamp duty, limitation, or absence of demand. Notice of Motion must be dismissed.

Parties
First Plaintiff: Lars Hallen; Second Plaintiff: Sten Unnerstedt; First Defendant: Sven-Olov Angledal; Second Defendant: Margaretha Irene Angledal
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
10 June 1999
Procedural Posture
Notice of Motion / Summons to Enforce Foreign Arbitral Award / Interlocutory (hearing and Determination of Notice of Motion for Adjournment or Stay)
Outcome
Defendants' Notice of Motion dismissed with costs. Plaintiffs' motion for security stood over.
Legal Topics
Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards, International Arbitration Act 1974 (cth), Adjournment/stay Pending Challenge in Seat of Arbitration, Stamp Duty on Share Transfer Agreements, Limitation of Actions for Enforcement of Award
Commercial Law Arbitration Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards International Arbitration Act 1974 (cth) Adjournment/stay Pending Challenge in Seat of Arbitration Stamp Duty on Share Transfer Agreements Limitation of Actions for Enforcement of Award

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lars Hallen

First Plaintiff

Sten Unnerstedt

Second Plaintiff

Sven-Olov Angledal

First Defendant

Margaretha Irene Angledal

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Notice of Motion / Summons to Enforce Foreign Arbitral Award / Interlocutory (hearing and Determination of Notice of Motion for Adjournment or Stay)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether proceedings in Sweden to set aside arbitral award justified adjournment of enforcement proceedings under s.8(8) International Arbitration Act 1974 (Cth)
  2. 2 Whether absence of stamp duty on share transfer agreement precludes enforcement proceedings
  3. 3 Whether the Limitation Act 1969 (NSW) provides a limitation defence to enforcement of Award

Ratio Decidendi

Defendants failed to satisfy the court that a proper application had been made to a competent authority in Sweden to set aside the award, or to show a prima facie case. No basis for stay/adjournment on grounds of stamp duty, limitation, or absence of demand. Notice of Motion must be dismissed.

Court Disposition

Defendants' Notice of Motion dismissed with costs. Plaintiffs' motion for security stood over.

Orders

  • The defendants' Notice of Motion filed on 2 June 1999 be dismissed with costs.
  • The plaintiffs' Notice of Motion filed on 7 June 1999 be stood over to 11 June 1999.